[ARENA] Fw: University of Antwerp: Call for Papers - Public Private Partnership in Contemporary Art

[arena]

Public Private Partnership in Contemporary Art

University of Antwerp

Venusstraat 23
B 2000 Antwerp
Belgium
Phone: + 32 3 265 54 87
Contact: Frederik Swennen
frederik.swennen  ua.ac.be

www.theartsfaculty.eu

Deadline:
31st December 2009
This call for papers aims at academics or academic organisations with  
a view of participating as a EU or Switzerland country reporter to an  
expert seminar on Public Private Partnership in Contemporary Art in  
Antwerp, Belgium on Sat. 24th April 2010. The organiser will cover  
travel and accommodation costs.

The contemporary art fair artbrussels 28 takes place in Brussels from  
22nd to 26th April 2010.
On the occasion of the art fair, an international 2-day legal seminar  
on Public Private Partnership in Contemporary Art is open for  
participation. On day 1, a public debate will take place on  
artbrussels. On day 2, an expert seminar will be held in Antwerp  
(Appendix 1. Programme - Appendix 2. Background).

Intention to participate should be submitted by 31st December 2009 to  
frederik.swennen  ua.ac.be. Proposals should contain a short cv and an  
outline (5 lines) of the proposed text.

A rough questionnaire will be provided by the beginning of January 2010.
A text of max 20 p. with the country report is expected by 1st April  
2010. No fee is provided for this text.
The expert seminar takes place on 24th April 2010, where a  
comparative report will be presented and a discussion will be held.
The country reporters will then have until 24th May to submit their  
final report.
The proceedings will be published by Intersentia publishers by  
September 2010.


Appendix 1. Programme

Day 1. Public Debate – 23rd April 2010 – artbrussels (Brussels Expo)

The private-public art depot: win-win?

To approach private art collections with a professional collection  
policy concerning collection management (acquisition / care / use),  
research and preservation, could benefit both the collector and the  
public authorities responsible for the cultural heritage.

How does Public Private Partnership fit into this area?

General introduction
Prof. Frederik Swennen (University of Antwerp)

Invited international case-studies
- Momart (London, UK): private art depot
- La Maison Rouge (Paris, France): art exhibitions or Langen  
Foundation (Neuss, Germany)
- Schaulager (Basel, Switzerland): conservation, research and  
dissemination of art
- Museum Boijmans Van Beuningen (Rotterdam, The Netherlands): The  
Collections Building

Debate

Day 2. Expert Seminar – 24th April 2010 – University of Antwerp

Public Private Partnership in Contemporary Art

General introduction

Philosophical approach
Sociological approach
Managerial approach

Comparative law
o Country reports (reporters from EU countries)
o Comparative report

Appendix 2. Background

During the last decade, numerous (semi-)private initiatives – both  
personal and corporate, both individual and collective – have been  
developed in contemporary art. Private collectors play a prominent  
role, not in the least because of the high density of private art  
collections. Some private collections are considered of museological  
importance.

Legal measures regarding private collections include supporting,  
restraining and stimulating measures.

Private collectors often consider these measures as superfluous  
restrictions to their activities rather than as incentives with a  
view to facilitating their commitment to public collections.
On the one hand, existing crossovers between public and private  
collections are mostly applied on an ad hoc-basis. A predictable  
policy – thus: legal certainty – is lacking.
On the other hand, better crossovers are considered necessary, e.g.  
an extension of the possibility to transfer art objects to other tax  
regimes or a review of the deductibility of donations of works of art.

As a result, over the past years some initiatives have been  
undertaken by which private art collectors – as (a group of) private  
individuals or as (a group of) companies – have acted out as  
protagonists in the contemporary art sector by creating their own  
(legal and managerial) structures. Regarding its legal translation,  
this outing is generally presented as an alternative to the public  
art collections rather than a dialogue therewith, e.g. rather with a  
private foundation than by loaning or donating a gift.

All parties concerned however consider the elaboration of better  
crossovers between the public and the private necessary.

Firstly, there is an unbalance in available capital . On the one  
hand, the standstill of public resources for art hampers the  
creation, conservation and dissemination of public art collections,  
especially in the light of the high market for contemporary art.  
Public museums, however, are usually better equipped in terms of  
staff, space and assets for the conservation of and care for works of  
art. On the other hand, private collectors, with often multiple  
budgets compared to public resources, have acquired a factual  
primacy. This raises important questions over the role that public  
authorities should take in the contemporary art sector, in light of  
the low level of know-how amongst private collectors on conservation,  
documentation and care of their collection.

There is thus a second, substantive, need. It seems that in  
contemporary art in particular, public and private collections are  
increasingly fulfilling interchangeable functions. On the one hand,  
private collections tend to 'professionalize' or 'objectify'. In this  
way, the horizontal and vertical boundaries of the structures  
directed by private or corporate collectors and the publicly managed  
museum become alike. Beside, there is public interest to ensure the  
aforementioned functions regarding private collections in order to  
prevent their loss, e.g. after transmission of a collection by  
inheritance, or mergers and acquisitions of companies. On the other  
hand, private collectors contribute to a new form of unlocking public  
collections, e.g. by way of an ad hoc curatorship, from a subjective  
point of view rather than with an objective, encyclopaedic purpose.
A third reason lies in the fact that private collections' chances of  
survival in the long term are low in the absence of support – be it  
financial or in terms of know-how – from the public domain.

Public authorities currently lack efficient tools so as to stimulate  
private collectors to create crossovers. Research into private and  
public tools regarding art collections will enable the creation of  
efficient crossovers.

As PPP in the broad sense is considered, every of the three following  
means by which the public authorities responsible for cultural  
heritage may reach out to private (personal or corporate) art  
collectors:
- supporting measures, such as public subventions to private entities  
fulfilling functions of an art centre or cultural heritage organisation;
- restraining measures, such as property restrictions with a view of  
protecting the cultural heritage, e.g. export restrictions for top  
pieces;
- stimulating measures, such as favourable tax regimes for private  
foundations or inherited art collections that are open to the public;  
payment of inheritance taxes with art objects, deductibility from  
income taxes of (promised) gifts.